評論
打印
Well, it's the relative importance.
就是二者間的相對重要性。
You would say -- yeah, yeah, yeah, we all know this;water covers twice the area of the planet than dry land.
也許你會說，是，是，是，我們都知道，地球上水覆蓋的面積是陸地的兩倍。
But it's a question of perception, and if that's what you're thinking, if that's what you think I mean when I say, This is an ocean planet stupidly called Earth.
但這是一個觀念上的問題。如果這就是你們所想的，我是說當我提到這個海洋星球被愚蠢地叫做地球時你們想的就是這個的話，
If you think that that's the relative importance, two to one, you're wrong by a factor of ten.
如果你認為這就是它們的相對重要性，2比1，那你就錯了，錯了10倍。
Now, you're not as thick as two short planks, but you sound like it when you say Earth, because that demonstration, if I turned around this way
你不會覺得自己跟這兩片木板一樣的厚吧？但是，你說“地球”時就好象是這么認為的，這是因為演示的關系，如果我把它這樣轉過來，
That earth plane would be as thin as paper.
地球平面就會跟紙一樣薄。
It's a thin film, two-dimensional existence.
這是個薄層，以二維形式存在。
The ocean representation would have a depth to it.
而海洋的演示會表現(xiàn)出深度。
And if you hefted those two things you might find that the relative scale of those is 20 to 1.
而且如果以體積來衡量二者你會發(fā)現(xiàn)它們的相對比例是20比1.
It turns out that something more than 94 percent of life on earth is aquatic.
事實上超過94%的地球生命是水生生物。
That means that us terrestrials occupy a minority.
也就是說我們這些陸生者只占據(jù)了很小的一部分。
The problem we have in believing that is you just have to give up this notion that this Earth was created for us.
我們在思想上有個問題，我們必須放棄地球是為了我們而存在的想法。
Because it's a problem we have.
因為我們確實有這個問題，
If this is an ocean planet and we only have a small minority of this planet,it just interferes with a lot of what humanity thinks.
如果這是個海洋行星而我們只擁有其一小部分的話，人類的很多想法都會有所不同。
Okay. Let me criticize this thing.
好的，下來我要批評一個事情。
I'm not talking about James Cameron although I could, but I won't.
我說的不是詹姆斯·卡梅隆，雖然我可以，但我不打算這么做。
You really do have to go and see his latest film,Aliens of the Deep. It's incredible.
你們真的有必要去看下他最新的電影，《深海異形》。不可思議的電影。
It features two of these deep rovers,and I can criticize them because these sweet things are mine.
里面描述了兩架這種深海探測器，我批評它們，因為這些可愛的東西是我的。
This, I think, represents one of the most beautiful classic submersibles built.
這個，我想，是最漂亮的經典潛水器之一。
If you look at that sub, you'll see a sphere.
仔細看這個潛水器，你會看到一個球體。
This is an acryclic sphere.
這不是一個可以輪轉的球體。
It generates all of the buoyancy,all of the payload for the craft,and the batteries are down here hanging underneath,exactly like a balloon.
它的全部浮力的產生，全部載重的放置，電池懸掛在下方就好象熱氣球一樣。
This is the envelope, and this is the gondola, the payload.
這是氣囊，這是吊籃、載荷。
Also coming up later for criticism are these massive lights.
接下來要批評的，還有這一大堆的燈。
And this one actually carries two great manipulators.
這一個，攜帶有兩個很大的機械手。
It actually is a very good working sub that's what it was designed for.
這確實是一個非常好的工作裝置，這也是它的設計目的。
The problem with it is and the reason I will never build another one like it is that this is a product of two-dimensional thinking.
它的問題所在，也是我永遠不會再建一個這種潛水器的原因，就是這是一個二維思維的產物。
It's what we humans do when we go in the ocean as engineers;
作為工程師，我們人類深入海洋的思維方式就是這樣。
we take all our terrestrial hang-ups,all our constraints importantly,these two-dimensional constraints that we have,
我們把自己所有在陸地上的困擾，所有的限制，特別是這些二維思維的限制，
and they're so constrained we don't even understand it and we take them underwater.
它們的束縛如此之深以至于我們甚至意識不到，而我們把這些都帶到了海里。
You notice that Jim Cameron is sitting in a seat.
你們可以看到卡梅隆正在里面坐著。
A seat works in a two-dimensional world,where gravity blasts down on that seat, OK?
一個在二維世界中存在起作用的座椅是重力把人按在座椅上的，OK？
And in a two-dimensional world.
而在一個二維世界中，
We do know about the third dimension but we don't use it because to go up requires an awful lot of energy against gravity.
我們知道第三維，但并不會利用它，因為要向上飛需要很多的能量來克服重力。
